I have 4 different Blind resume comparisons (8 teams in total). Just curious, where would you rank these teams relative to each other?

For each of these, I'm comparing overall record, Best wins/losses and Average win percentage of their opponents.

SCENARIO 1
----------------------------
Team A is undefeated with their 3 best wins being vs. teams with records of 8-1, 7-2 and 5-4
The average Win % of their opponents is 47%

Team B is undefeated with their 3 best wins being vs. teams with records of 5-4, 5-5 and 5-5
The average Win % of their opponents is 43%

Who Should be ranked higher by the committee?
------------------------------
SCENARIO 2
------------------------------
Team C is 8-1 with their 3 best wins being vs. teams with records of 8-1, 6-3 and 6-4.
Their 1 loss came against an undefeated team on the road.
The average win % of Team C's opponents is 55%

Team D is 8-1 with their 3 best wins being vs. teams with records of 8-1, 7-2 and 6-3.
Their 1 loss came against an undefeated team on the road.
The average win % of Team D's opponents is 53%

Who should be ranked higher by the committee?
-----------------------------

SCENARIO 3
------------------------------
Team E is 8-1 with their 3 best wins being vs. teams with records of 6-3, 6-4 and 5-4.
Their 1 loss came against a team that is also 8-1.
The average win % of Team E's opponents is 47%

Team F is 8-1 with their 3 best wins being vs. teams with records of 6-3, 6-4 and 5-5.
Their 1 loss came against a team that is also 8-1.
The average win % of Team F's opponents is 48%

Who should be ranked higher by the committee?
--------------------------------

SCENARIO 4
---------------------------------
Team G is 7-2 with their 3 best wins being vs. teams with records of 8-1, 7-2 and 5-5
Their 2 losses came against 2 teams currently ranked in the CFP top 25 (one of which is top 10)
The average win % of Team E's opponents is 56%

Team H is 7-2 with their 3 best wins being vs. teams with records of 7-2, 6-3 and 6-4
Their 2 losses came against 2 teams currently ranked in the CFP top 25 (one of which is top 10)
The average win % of Team F's opponents is 59%

Who should be ranked higher by the committee?
------------------------------------

I'll reveal which teams are which and what their actual current CFP ranking is tomorrow

MisterJones said:

---

I need to know where each team was ranked to start the season

---

I see what you did there

I cannot answer because I need to know the skill level of certain positions on offense and defense.

I'll play for real:

Scenario 1 is obviously team A

The other three scenarios seem like a wash and need more info

MisterJones said:

---

I'll play for real:

Scenario 1 is obviously team A

The other three scenarios seem like a wash and need more info

---

So would you say scenario 2 the teams are too close to really tell the difference?

Also, if you had to make picks, what would you rank them relative to each other

Scenario A: Can't possibly know without knowing the margin of victory of each win.

Are the opponents all from the same conference? Was the 8-1 opponent from the Missouri Valley conference or the SEC?

Scenario 1 - Depends on how many games played and the margins of victory. I would lean team A should be ranked higher but too close to tell. I would rank them the same and eye test determine the better team

Scenario 2 - Even closer, I would lean team C but depends on margins of loss/victory and comparing wins.

Scenario 3 - lean team E, but the 3rd best win is tricky because 5-5 is not great. I would probably rank them similar but compare the losses and eye test


Honestly great job presenting such balanced resumes

I would need to know the strength of schedule. Just the W/L is a bit misleading.

Gump 02 said:

---

I would need to know the strength of schedule. Just the W/L is a bit misleading.

---

Exactly. But you are adding an infamous "eye test."

">" means ranked higher


A > B
C = D
E = F
H > G slightly

Assuming the wins are all against Power 5

Gump 02 said:

---

I would need to know the strength of schedule. Just the W/L is a bit misleading.

---

That's why I put the win percentage of the opponents. It's a clue to strength of schedule

If I had to default, I would mostly go with the team that had the better strength of schedule, or more impressive win (margin of victory, home or away, etc)

caleblyn said:

---

">" means ranked higher


A > B
C = D
E = F
H > G slightly

Assuming the wins are all against Power 5

---

Why does that matter? Florida State and Mississippi state are "power 5" teams. Are you saying a win vs Florida state is better than a win against Memphis?

A is Oregon
B is Indiana
C is OSU
D is Boise State
E is Penn St
F is Wash St
G is Georgia
H is Mizzou

hth

Yellerjacket said:

---

Scenario A: Can't possibly know without knowing the margin of victory of each win.

Are the opponents all from the same conference? Was the 8-1 opponent from the Missouri Valley conference or the SEC?

---

First, the MVC is an FCS conference… not applicable to this conversation.

Second, None of the teams listed are from the MAC, or sunbelt or conference USA… but even if they were, the opponents win percentage would take care of that problem anyway. Thats why I took the trouble to calculate opponents win percentage. I think it's a much better measure than what conference they're in.

agchugger said:

---

A is Oregon
B is Indiana
C is OSU
D is Boise State
E is Penn St
F is Wash St
G is Georgia
H is Mizzou

hth

---

Almost… and no, it doesn't help. It's supposed to be a BLIND resume to eliminate name recognition bias or conference bias. One thing I learned from the exercise is that the Big 10 (outside Oregon and OSU) are WAY overrated. Shouldn't have 4 of the 5 top spots for sure. Some of the weakest opponent win percentage of all the playoff contenders

If one of them is PSU their current ranking and remaining schedule is horse****

rootube said:

---

If one of them is PSU their current ranking and remaining schedule is horse****

---

Yes, one of them is PSU and yes, their strength of schedule is horse ****

I would love if the committee looked at it like this but you would need to include way more data.

bearcat said:

---

I would love if the committee looked at it like this but you would need to include way more data.

---

Yep

As an example, Just saying a teams best win is over a 6-3 team isnt enough because Colorado st us 6-3 and so is South Carolina-which win is better?

bearcat said:

---

I would love if the committee looked at it like this but you would need to include way more data.

---

I agree, there are probably about 10 more relevant data points that could get a pretty accurate and reasonable ranking. I just don't think "what conference are you in" and "what was your preseason ranking" should be in the mix. Unfortunately, they are. I want to dive even deeper and analyze strength of schedule and strength of record numbers not only for a team, but for their opponents in order to determine who really deserves to be in. I think it's BS that Indiana is probably going to make the playoff but if Georgia loses to Tennessee, they'll be left out. If Georgia played Indiana head to head on a neutral field they would win 8 times out of 10

agspirit_09 said:

---

I have 4 different Blind resume comparisons (8 teams in total). Just curious, where would you rank these teams relative to each other?

For each of these, I'm comparing overall record, Best wins/losses and Average win percentage of their opponents.

SCENARIO 1
----------------------------
Team A is undefeated with their 3 best wins being vs. teams with records of 8-1, 7-2 and 5-4
The average Win % of their opponents is 47%

Team B is undefeated with their 3 best wins being vs. teams with records of 5-4, 5-5 and 5-5
The average Win % of their opponents is 43%

Who Should be ranked higher by the committee?
------------------------------
SCENARIO 2
------------------------------
Team C is 8-1 with their 3 best wins being vs. teams with records of 8-1, 6-3 and 6-4.
Their 1 loss came against an undefeated team on the road.
The average win % of Team C's opponents is 55%

Team D is 8-1 with their 3 best wins being vs. teams with records of 8-1, 7-2 and 6-3.
Their 1 loss came against an undefeated team on the road.
The average win % of Team D's opponents is 53%

Who should be ranked higher by the committee?
-----------------------------

SCENARIO 3
------------------------------
Team E is 8-1 with their 3 best wins being vs. teams with records of 6-3, 6-4 and 5-4.
Their 1 loss came against a team that is also 8-1.
The average win % of Team E's opponents is 47%

Team F is 8-1 with their 3 best wins being vs. teams with records of 6-3, 6-4 and 5-5.
Their 1 loss came against a team that is also 8-1.
The average win % of Team F's opponents is 48%

Who should be ranked higher by the committee?
--------------------------------

SCENARIO 4
---------------------------------
Team G is 7-2 with their 3 best wins being vs. teams with records of 8-1, 7-2 and 5-5
Their 2 losses came against 2 teams currently ranked in the CFP top 25 (one of which is top 10)
The average win % of Team E's opponents is 56%

Team H is 7-2 with their 3 best wins being vs. teams with records of 7-2, 6-3 and 6-4
Their 2 losses came against 2 teams currently ranked in the CFP top 25 (one of which is top 10)
The average win % of Team F's opponents is 59%

Who should be ranked higher by the committee?
------------------------------------

---

Team A is BYU and Team B is Indiana. Clearly an instance of Big 10 Bias to have Indiana ranked above BYU. Not by much, but still, BYU has much stronger wins on their resume, but they arent a part of the big 10, so they dont get a bump.

Team C is Ohio State and Team D is Boise State. Their resumes are almost indistinguishable down to a narrow loss against a common opponent, yet OSU is 2nd and Boise is 13th? Obvious Big 10 bias at play here.

Team E is Penn State and Team F is Washington State. Again, very similar resumes here, and again a case of big 10 bias. Penn State is 4 and Washington state is 18? Give me a break.

Finally, Team G is Georgia and Team H is the Ags. I would say overall this one the committee got mostly right, although I would have UGA and the Ags closer in the rankings than 12 and 15 respectively.

There should be a bias to Big 10 and SEC. Their competition is simply better on a week to week basis.

Inequalities in scheduling make these comparisons unrealistic. Instead of teams best wins make that conference wins only and don't compare teams between conferences. The Big 12 isn't competitive with Sec or Big 10' based on their dismal playoff record. These huge conferences with no divisions makes schedules way more uneven. For example, tu and LSU play way different schedules. LSU might be better than tu if they played. In fact if tu played Bama, LSU and Miss instead of Fla, Kent and MSu, they would probably have 3-4 losses right now.

bearcat said:

---

There should be a bias to Big 10 and SEC. Their competition is simply better on a week to week basis.

---

SEC, absolutely. What's your evidence that the big 10 is "better competition"? Outside of the top 4, they are at best mediocre. Just like big xii and acc… actually, acc has more teams over .500 than big 10 and the big xii has the same number of teams over .500 with 2 fewer members.

agspirit_09 said:

---

bearcat said:

---

There should be a bias to Big 10 and SEC. Their competition is simply better on a week to week basis.

---

SEC, absolutely. What's your evidence that the big 10 is "better competition"? Outside of the top 4, they are at best mediocre. Just like big xii and acc… actually, acc has more teams over .500 than big 10 and the big xii has the same number of teams over .500 with 2 fewer members.

---

Yep

Other than Oregon, Ohio st, Penn st and indiana, the big10 is average to bad

There's not a lot of good football being played n that conference this year


There are probably about 6-8 sec teams that would be 10-0 or 9-1 playing the schedules that those 4 teams have played


Texas
Bama
Tennessee
Georgia
A&M
Ole Miss
Maybe lsu
Maybe South Carolina

NyAggie said:

---

agspirit_09 said:

---

bearcat said:

---

There should be a bias to Big 10 and SEC. Their competition is simply better on a week to week basis.

---

SEC, absolutely. What's your evidence that the big 10 is "better competition"? Outside of the top 4, they are at best mediocre. Just like big xii and acc… actually, acc has more teams over .500 than big 10 and the big xii has the same number of teams over .500 with 2 fewer members.

---

Yep

Other than Oregon, Ohio st, Penn st and indiana, the big10 is average to bad

There's not a lot of good football being played n that conference this year


There are probably about 6-8 sec teams that would be 10-0 or 9-1 playing the schedules that those 4 teams have played


Texas
Bama
Tennessee
Georgia
A&M
Ole Miss
Maybe lsu
Maybe South Carolina

---

Absolutely. I think South Carolina would be undefeated in any other conference but the SEC

The Ohio State/Boise State comp is the most egregious to me.

The fun thing is we will get to see the bias play out in real life when all the Big10 teams (outside of Oregon) get romped in the playoffs